A Few Other Points
The study done by the North Dakota ANG, showed that an F-15N with two Phoenix Missiles had less range than the Tomcat with six Phoenix Missiles!
The F-15N would not be able to fulfill the “fleet defense” fighter role. Mass formations of SNA, looking through powerful jamming, operating with autonomy are not performances the F-15N is good at.
Which shows perfectly that the two fighters were designed with different missons in mind. The F-14 carries 4 of its Phoenix Missiles in a low drag arrangement under the fuselage – something only possible if you design your plane with that capability from the beginning. The smaller F-15 looses considerable more range when having to carry around those huge missiles.
Also the F-14 is very efficient at low speed patroling with wings swept forward. This results in way more on-station time compared to the F-15 which is optimised for high speed fights only.
2 Minutes sounds rather optimistic. That would mean a very significant drag reduction. I have to check that.
I agree, its a lot. Maybe the standard pylon data is from a US Navy Hornet with older engines while the Swiss F-18s all have the enhanced performance engine (something like 7700 vs 8000 kg of thrust i believe).
As you probably know, the Swiss AF developed a new AAM pylon for their Hornets.
The improvements in capability are pretty good if you ask me:
time to climb to 49000ft at Mach 1.4 carrying 4 AMRAAMs and 2 Sidewinders:
Hornet with bathtub pylons: 7.5 min
Hornet with low drag pylon: 5.5 min
Clean Hornet would be at 4.2 min
I got this data from a Swiss magazine.
Found a pic here: http://www.rob.clubkawasaki.com/jas6079.jpg
The Hornets digital camo reminds me of an F-16 in standard camo. 😀
Are you suggesting that perhaps the B2s get an escort to cover up the fact that their stealth capability is not that great?
That would be possible, but i have no idea.
I would say main reason for the escorts is to make it harder to collect B-2 rcs and/or ir data.
Thanks Flanker man, but it seems to me two Eagles escorting a B-2 are not exactly a perfect solution. 😉
The F-117 can be fitted with some kind of RCS increaser when necessary as for air show flights. My guess is the B-2 has something similar.
However, i wonder why the B-2 always gets an escort since that incident .
But other programs have their strong points too. :diablo:
The better radar gives you not only range advantages but you can identify the enemy in an ecm environment or against ground clutter.
On the other hand the F-15 might be able to evade the F-16 Radar more easily.
And you can always play the hunter/killer game where one Eagle stays behind and illuminates the clueless Vipers and the other Eagles get close in radar silence.
The F-15 was designed to counter the MiG-25 and as a more nimble replacement for the F-4 from the lessons learned in Vietnam. But these requirements were virtually the same, because the MiG-25 was thought to be a Mach 3 air superiority fighter (which it wasnt of course). The original requirements for the F-15 also included at least Mach 2.7 top speed.
hehe, just yesterday i watched a docu where a young men from New York wanted to join the air force. The nice army recruiting officer showed a picture of the comanche. “Hell, if you have such a cool stealth helicopter, i will join the army.” 😀
Well they have to be. Carrying lots of fuel, weapons, avionics and big engines surely needs internal space.
Btw, does anybody know the fuel capacity of the F-22?
The EFs movable intake might increase the RCS compared to the Rafales fixed design.
But any difference becomes quite irrelevant once you carry any weapons i guess.
Yes, they changed that during the last 3 years. 😉
Yes, nice pics and looks like a great spotter day.
But whats that IRIS-T under the F-16? Already integrated?